Death toll now over 1,000 in Iraq
 

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The U.S. military death toll in Iraq reached 1,000 on Tuesday nearly 18 months after the invasion to topple Saddam Hussein, making its mark on the U.S. presidential election campaign.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=6173004

-------------------------------------------------

Congratulations, Mr. President. I hope you're a happy man who can look the mothers of these dead soldiers in the eye and tell them their son died for a just cause. Tell the children who suddenly have no father how much you value their family, since you are such a wholesome, family values man.

Since you feel so strongly about "nation building" in Iraq, maybe you should ask President Kerry if you could head to Baghdad for a post as "Special Ambassador for Freedom." You could work closely with the Iraqi people, and be there for the long haul. Oh, and you could request about the same amount of armored protection the average soldier gets...

That was wonderfully inflammatory of you...

Sen. Kennedy was predicting upwards to 50,000 US deaths.

only 1/3 of the way to the deathtoll of the morning of 9/11

Hey, if this thing keeps going until 2067, it could become another Vietnam.

is there a non-partisan option for this thread?

I wish there was. I said "President Kerry" because I'd take anyone over Bush, and Kerry's the only real option. I can live with four years of Kerry. Four years of Bush not worrying about getting re-elected scares me more than Four years of that basset-hound faced fake John Kerry. Kerry to me seems like the type to stand in front of the mirror saying "Ladies & gentlemen, the President of the United States..." Bush seems like the same type, but he screws it up... Since I don't feel I can actually vote for Kerry with a clear conscience, and I sure will not vote for Bush, I'm gonna write in my vote for John McCain!

Well, considering NY elected Hilary Clinton, I can't say this post is a big surprise.

I realize there are many legitimate reasons to oppose the war. But I'm just curious, what number of deaths do you think would be reasonable for a year long military campaign?

How about: we salute and honor those who gave their lives in service to this country. Those of us who pray will keep their families in our prayers, and those of us who don't will do what we can to remember their service.

First of all, if you are going to make a post like this, at least check your spelling. Mis-spelling the first word of your post doesn't lend much to your credibility.

Second, why do people think that this was an easy thing for him to do? Why do people assume that since he made the decision to send troops he must me jumping up and down in the Oval Office saying "Woo Hoo, I sent Americans off to die!" That is just ignorant to say that since he had to make this tough decision, and since you don't agree with what he decided, that he doesn't have family values.

Thirdly, Kerry was the one who voted against Bush's request for extra money to give the troops additional protection, armor, etc...

Fourth, unless you have gone and interviewed the family of each of the thousand people that have died over there, don't impress your opinion on them and say incinuate that they dont' think they died for a just cause. Maybe the supported the president's decision, maybe they didn't. You don't know that and neither do I. If you don't agree with it fine, but don't stoop as to insult an American Soldier who gave his life like that!

Lastly, why did you not make this post when the 1st, 2nd, or 999th person was killed? What is so special about the number 1,000? Does the 1,000th person killed deserve more recognition for what he did for his country than all the rest of the people who have given their life?

In other words, just SHUT UP!!! Or if you are going to make such inflammatory, unneccesary posts, at least spell check them and do your research to make sure you are even making a point!!!!!

thank you!

Well put.

I'm just shocked that I'm not on the ignore list of every conservative on this site! I've found that the only thing a conservative hates more than a liberal is someone who disagrees with both conservatives and liberals.

I have trouble comprehending how anyone can take the side of George Walker Bush on Iraq. Has he attended the services of one fallen soldier in the Iraq campaign? To the best of my knowledge he has not.

Bush knows that the conservative base he has will vote for him even though they cannot stand him and most of his policies. As long as people vote for the lesser of two evils, this nation is doomed to have mediocre leadership. In a "war" against terrorism, we need a leader much stronger than Bush or Kerry. We need a leader who is not going to run around with a smile or smirk on his face, more concerned with an upcoming election than telling those voters the truth about the situation we find ourselves in, and how to correct the problems in this nation that will continue as long as we love having open borders, SUV's and corporate greed that is more important than national security.

Agreed. Rock on, sister.

olie, is it too late to come to your party? :)

BigJohn,

A little advice, less MTV, more Fox News. :)

We get it already, you don't like Bush :rolleyes:

Thank you for noting my spelling error. It has been corrected. I'm sure glad you noticed that, as it made me look like quite the stooge!

As for the rest of your comment, I never said that Bush was jumping up and down over the deaths. I don't know how much it affects him at all. Maybe he drops to his knees with every reported death, crying to God "Why, why take him! This is so unfair..." For all we know, he is putting on the best poker face ever.

And how dare you accuse me of insulting those soldiers who gave their lives in military service for this nation. Most of my family served in the military. I considered it, but could not get in with my back. Whether 1 or 1000 die in Iraq, it is not worth it. How many more will die to "liberate" these people who seem so grateful for the new freedom that Bush has given them. Why now and not after the first? Maybe I just felt like ranting when I heard that the number hit 1,000. Too bad your favorite president has not gone to even one of those funerals.


BTW... "incinuate" is spelled insinuate, there should not be a comma after "decided," the apostrophe in "dont'" should be between the n & t, and "unneccessary" only has one "c."

No it wasnt well put. It was written. But i can find flaws in that statement as well.

Why does everybody press the issue on the 87 billon dollar package and saying Kerry voted against giving the troops extra armor?

Do some research please. Do you know that particular bill was voted on 4 times and redrafted three times before the first vote?

And that clause was one of HUNDREDS in the bill, a responsible person should simply single out one issue in it. But sadly, thats what many political adds do.

Correction:

Your the one who started spewing bile right off the bat here. Exactly what reaction were you expecting?


Two points here. One, I can take his side because I know and understand that the world changed on 9/11. We can't sit back anymore. Iraq was dangerous according to the Clinton administration, and no amount of UN diplomacy was changing the situation. I'm glad he had the courage to do what it takes to make this country safer for my family.

Second, interesting bit on the funerals. I went and did a quick web search. Interestingly, I found articles going back to early 2003 talking about this. Seems to be a common theme reiterated over and over in a bunch of articles. So now Bush is between a rock and a hard place: were he to actually go to one, it would be decried as a "photo-op". But interesting how much of a banner cry this has been among lots of web sites and blogs.


I disagree that most conservatives don't like Bush. I think he's doing a fantastic job. What exactly do you want him to do about the open borders? I haven't even heard this as a campaign issue; is Kerry planning to do something different?

What's wrong with SUVs? I'm still not sure why SUVs are so decried, when Vans in the 70s and super-sized station wagons weren't a problem. Start doing something about the gas-guzzling waste-spewing commercial trucks on the road instead of picking on a useful utility vehicle for families (you try taking a trip with one or two kids in a Toyota Corolla). You do realise that minivans don't get much better gas mileage, don't you?

And most of the "corporate greed" that's being hammered now occurred during the later years of the Clinton administration. What exactly did Bush do wrong here again?

Ah yes, the famous "all Iraqis hate us" line. You do realise that the vast majority of the country is safe, free from the bombings that make the news, with a vastly improved infrastructure over what was there before we went in? The news focuses on the one area where fighting is still occurring while ignoring the rest of the country. What was the last story you heard about the Kurds up in the north, for example? Iraq is a big country, but all the news you get is from the "Sunni Triangle" area.

Wrong enemy.

On the funeral comment....

President Bush has not gone to any funerals. He has visited with the families of fallen soldiers to tell them how much their service meant to this country. He's been to Iraq to tell the soldiers how much their service is appreciated. He's gone to military/VA hospitals and spoke with wounded soldiers.

Now back to your regular partisan bashing. ;)

G.R.O.B.J.&.T.L. ;)

Look, when they originally talked about that Bill everyone loved it, then when it got to them it had all of these specific grants and monies to companies that built "old school" stuff that most everyone agrees needs to be pushed out in place of new, different stuff for a different type of war. Its awfully one sided to poin t out the body armor faction and leave out all of the rest. And also keep in mind, MANY millions of dollars aimed at catching Osama was siphoned off to Iraq without congress knowing until auditors caught it. Lets be fair here.

PS - im voting for Kerry and was/am for the war in Iraq. Its possible to believe in both.

Wrong again.

There's nothing I hate more than a liberal.


Boy, you're really on a roll here, wrong yet again.

I've said it before, I'll say it again -- although when we disagree, it's usually a major disagreement, on the whole there hasn't been a President in my lifetime that I've agreed with more often nor been as enthusiatically supportive of than this one.

havnt we debated this before.....Ill summarize the last debate.

You: see TONS of information regarding bombings, and "negatives" in Iraq and see "some" news that speaks of good, then you minimize the bad and maximize the good

Me: see TONS of information regarding bombings, and "negatives" in Iraq and see "some" news that speaks of good, then I using the same percentage come to the conclusion, that there is more bad than good going on in Iraq, right now, on the whole (this is inclusive of everything - attityudes, violence, international community, leadership, infrastructure throughout, stability, etc.)

Keep in mind that being dirt poor yet being able to kick a soccer ball around I do not count as a good, to me that counts as a "nothing" (no slight intended) as it could be done before.

I never said it wasn't possible. But most people who are Pro-Kerry were/are anti-war.

Do I have to DOLA when I just want to quote and say, "WOW"?

Actually, the Democrats are split on the war issue. That's why Kerry is all over the map on it because he doesn't want to alienate his base.

Bad news sell papers and glue eyes to TV. As much as you like to believe, there is much more good going on in Iraq than you realized.

You should just put him on your ignore list.

It has done wonders for my enjoyment of FOFC lately. :)

Yep, he's pretty much screwed everytime he says anything about the current war, that's why his campaigners pretty much just stick to Vietnam.

With the amount of hate spewed at him, the drug allegations, the constant attempts to "get" him(see the national guard records ongoing struggle), its about time that Bush gets a nomination from Chris Rock to be the honorary second "black" president. Or does he need to get head in the oval office first.

i wont do that to anyone...it goes against my philosophy of hearing all sides about everything. tempting but I like Jon...he's just misguided.

Well, that and the fact that he has no real opinion of his own...

Is it sad the evil part of me wants Jon's kid to grow up and become a Senator or something as a Democrat and say in a speech one day his political hero is Ted Kennedy?

Dola -

Actually, he explained it in Rolling Stone pretty clearly - He gave authorization to Bush, then the President fucked it up. :-)

He doesn't have his own opinion? ;)

I take it back. Jordan Knight isn't the spawn of Satan. ;)

Evil, but not bad either. ;)


But I'm not too worried

Just curious, how many friends have you lost in Iraq? How many families of these people do you know, and know well?

And BTW, when Bush flew into Baghdad last year, he was taking the same risk as the aircrews we brief every day take flying into BIAP or Balad or Kirkuk or some other similar place. And finally, BIAP undergoes a regular dose of enemy fire every day and President Bush was not exempt from the stray mortar round with someone's name on it when it's there time. And as I recall, Bush wore no armor.

While I grieve for the fallen US soldiers, it also pains me that nobody mentions, or even knows, the number of Iraqi casualties...they are just as human...(well, most of them anyway...)

Duckman made a quick point, but I'll say it also: you are missing the part of the debate where I said:

You're judging how much good/bad is going on based on the percentage of stories you're getting from a media that is competing for attention? A new dam/school/powerplant being built does not sell newspapers, but a new bombing does. Hence the media focuses on the bombings and ignores (for the most part) all the good being done there. You can't make a judgement call that everything is bad just because those are the only stories you are seeing. As I said in my post above, when was the last time you heard anything about the Kurds in northern Iraq? That's a fair-sized chunk of the country that we're not hearing a thing about.

As for the soccer ball bit, you are vastly simplifying things. New schools and power plants are the basis for improving the quality of life across the board. People aren't pulled out of poverty overnight, you have to lay a foundation first.

It also pains me to what great lengths the USA has gone to not demolish towns full of Iraqi's and mosque's full of insurgents only to be spit on by the world's press and foreign leaders.

The US Military does recognize the Iraqi people as innocent civilians and works damned hard to ensure their safety as best we can in a war-zone. Done blame us if the press of the world ignores that.

That's the point I think ... we are already literally 1/3 of the way back to the death toll of 9/11, and IT WASNT NECESSARY. Bush destroyed the global goodwill we had after 9/11.

We got rid of an evil bastard sure, but he was a SECULAR evil bastard -- now we're more hated in the pathetic Muslim world than ever, and Iraq will end up in a civil war or with a Iranian type religious rule that hates us more than ever...

I voted for him in 2000, but BUSH HAS BEEN ONE OF THE WORST PRESIDENTS EVER! This election is not about Kerry, ITS A REFERENDUM ON BUSH -- that's the point most pundits are missing.

Global goodwill and 2 bucks will get you 2 double cheeseburgers at mCdonalds, but only if they have the dollar menu.

global goodwill? did we buy the world a coke?